All 1 Baroness Fookes contributions to the Advanced Research and Invention Agency Act 2022

Read Bill Ministerial Extracts

Tue 14th Dec 2021

Advanced Research and Invention Agency Bill

Baroness Fookes Excerpts
Baroness Fookes Portrait The Deputy Speaker (Baroness Fookes) (Con)
- Hansard - -

We come to Amendment 7 in the name of the noble Lord, Lord Clement-Jones. Is it moved or not moved?

Lord Clement-Jones Portrait Lord Clement-Jones (LD)
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

My Lords, I am speaking to and will support Amendment 9.

Baroness Fookes Portrait The Deputy Speaker (Baroness Fookes) (Con)
- Hansard - -

One moment. I asked about Amendment 7 in the noble Lord’s name.

--- Later in debate ---
Clause 8: Power to dissolve ARIA
Baroness Fookes Portrait The Deputy Speaker (Baroness Fookes) (Con)
- Hansard - -

Now we get there. Amendment 9, Lord Clement-Jones.

Amendment 9

Moved by
--- Later in debate ---
Viscount Stansgate Portrait Viscount Stansgate (Lab)
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

I thank the Minister for her reply. I look forward to reading the National Audit Office reports over the next few years and taking part in such discussions as we may have in this House on how ARIA is developing.

Baroness Fookes Portrait The Deputy Speaker (Baroness Fookes) (Con)
- Hansard - -

As the noble Viscount has made a short speech, I must now put the Question. The Question is that the amendment be agreed.

Viscount Stansgate Portrait Viscount Stansgate (Lab)
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

I should have added the words, “I beg leave to withdraw my amendment”.

Baroness Fookes Portrait The Deputy Speaker (Baroness Fookes) (Con)
- Hansard - -

I have just explained that, as the noble Viscount has made a short speech, it is not possible to withdraw, so I must put the Question. It is up to Members of the House how they vote.

Amendment 11 disagreed.
--- Later in debate ---
Viscount Hanworth Portrait Viscount Hanworth (Lab)
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

My Lords, my Amendment 13 does not differ greatly from the previous amendment. Indeed, it differs in only one word: “pure”. In proposing my amendment, I have been mindful that mathematics is in danger in universities from an attempt by administrators to reduce its presence. At the University of Leicester, where I am an emeritus professor, a considerable number of staff described either as “pure mathematicians” or “managerial sociologists” have been sacked. The so-called pure mathematicians have been sacked on account of the unpopularity of maths, as revealed in perennial student surveys. Mathematical subjects tend to be unpopular with students because they are challenging. Nevertheless, they are the backbone of degrees in science, engineering and other subjects. I suspect that the managerial sociologists have been sacked because administrators are loath to recognise the expertise of others in a subject in which they believe they have significant experience. Be that as it may, my present concern is with mathematics.

Very few mathematicians would call themselves “pure” mathematicians. They describe themselves as mathematicians without qualification. Pure maths is concerned with giving order and clarity to the subject of mathematics, of which the exposition stands in constant need of reform. Applied mathematics, as the name suggests, is concerned with applying mathematics to substantive issues. We cannot have the one without the other. Legislation that declares that mathematical advances are not science unless they are advances in representing the nature and behaviour of the physical and material universe speaks of a wrong-headed attitude on the part of administrators who may have little understanding of the nature of science. In derogating the role of mathematics, this attitude could have dire consequences. I hope that the acknowledgement of the importance of mathematics to science will serve to counteract the wave of intellectual vandalism occasioned by the insurgency of administrators that is sweeping through British universities. I beg to move the amendment standing in my name, but I propose that it should stand or fall with the other amendments in this group.

Baroness Fookes Portrait The Deputy Speaker (Baroness Fookes) (Con)
- Hansard - -

I think it may be helpful to your Lordships if I explain that only the first amendment in a group is moved. The noble Lord is speaking to his amendment, but it is moved or not moved only according to its place on the Marshalled List.

Viscount Stansgate Portrait Viscount Stansgate (Lab)
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

My Lords, I rise to speak in support of Amendments 12 and 14, to which I have added my name, and the other amendment in this group. I hope the House will appreciate that this is not a subject that was touched on in Committee—so it is fresh for consideration by the House today. It is nevertheless very important. The noble and gallant Lord, Lord Craig, and my noble friends Lord Browne and Lord Hanworth have set out the case in some detail, and I do not want to repeat some of the examples they gave, very good though they are. However, I emphasise that mathematical sciences are vital not just to the future of science but to the work of ARIA.

Amendments 12 and 14 are very simple. They would insert the words “and mathematical” in the definition of scientific knowledge and scientific research in Clause 11. These amendments arise because the mathematical community is unsure about whether mathematical sciences are sufficiently included in the definition in the Bill—and it is because the mathematics community is unsure that this debate is taking place. Sometimes people think of sciences as only, or mainly, the core sciences of biology, physics and chemistry, but this is not the case. Mathematics underpins all the other sciences —hence we now use the term STEM as a routine acronym.

Perhaps I could just briefly introduce into this debate the definition of mathematical sciences that is accepted in the community: it is a group of areas of study that includes, in addition to mathematics, those academic disciplines that are primarily mathematical in nature but may not be universally considered as sub-fields of mathematics proper, such as statistics, computer science, computational science, data science, quantitative biology, operations research, control theory, cryptology, econometrics, theoretical physics, continuum mechanics, mathematical chemistry and actuarial science.

--- Later in debate ---
Viscount Hanworth Portrait Viscount Hanworth (Lab)
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

I fully accept that the Bill has adopted the same definition of science found in previous legislation. However, this is not a reason for continuing to accept an obtuse and damaging definition. I beg leave to withdraw the amendment.

Baroness Fookes Portrait The Deputy Speaker (Baroness Fookes) (Con)
- Hansard - -

I am sorry, but we have the same problem again. I must put the question.

Amendment 13 disagreed.